Should PCs be forced to act a certain way because of their stats?

[Zelda Themelin]

With real life people charisma is hard to tell. First, your charsimatic won't always be mine. There are different qualities, opinions, positions, parsonality traits that read into favor of people. Experience, history, other's opinions.

Charisma is hard in real life.

Then again charisma in D&D is also strength of personality. And I think any american president has lot of that.

Charisma can also be intimidating like with avarage hag vr avarage human adventurer.
There is the magnetism angle too, you just ain't the target group.

There are lot of scientific means to measure intelligence. Some better than others.
But wisdom and charisma just gets into arguments.

Wisdom in sense it exist in D&D3.x animals does come up occasianlly. It's about ability to survive. There it can be measured, but to with limits. Since with people it rolls in lot other stuff than basic instinct and keen senses.

Intelligence in D&D was meant to be more than raw (with various calculation) IQ. It's also learning capasity, and some artistic ability. Magic skill is little like mathematics/music mäybe. I don't mean the performing art.

So basicly I think it's interesting but bit pointless to argue about wisdom/charisma. We can't even agree what those things mean in real world. But game on, this is kinda fun.

 

[Elf Witch]

I used to be one of those people who do pages of background for chars. Then I got burn-out. It's kinda boring, never really matters so much in game and you have to write lot of boring stuff for char who is just in lv 1. Sure sometimes for some games there is change to make some weird characacter even at lv 1 where background that's somewhat interesting.

I feel I am wasting people's time to make them read that. It's fun when character does some stuff during the real game and you have freedom to come up with all kinda stuff rather than be stuck with the case of crappy pre-write, which someone might want you to stick with.

Nowdays if I write anything on character few scenarions suggesting for place/time to start adventuring. Or some answer to question why I have this character class, ingame excuse.

As a DM I want some kind of back story. I really dislike characters that basically lived in a pod and emerged from the pod on the day the adventure starts.

That being said unless you are bringing a character in at a higher level it does not have to be an elaborate back story. I would like to know did your character grow up in a city or a village, does he have siblings and are his parents alive. Why is he choosing this moment to go out into the world. Things like that. A back story can be something like this. Gerrold grew up in a small farming village and comes from a big family he hates farming so he went out to see the world.

If your character is a wizard I would like to know did you study at a mage school or were you taught by single wizard. If you are a cleric when did you get the call has it been something you have felt since you were a child or is it something new.

Now players who do take the time to give me a more elaborate back story will see that back story mined for ideas and plot hooks in the game.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

Well Elf Witch, if we were playing together I might still have motivation to create more backstory. But, alas, as it stand people who I am actually playing like it very short, or even less.

Any new game in my current larger group starts with short description what character looks, and what gear s/he is wearing. Then if we have agreed to know each other we come up some bits about personality, and some weird habits if any. Then we proceed.
Sometimes I feel quite uninterested until game starts. Sometimes I have lot more story in my head, I will share during the game at some moments.

Sometimes we use pre-made chars, with open personality-slot.

Sologames I am playing or smaller group games I dm, are ones where I do background for character, I ask some questions, they are happy with that. "You invent it for me" is common request then we go back and forth about some details.

I used to have this long questionere chart for 'important' questions ranging from "what is your favorite color" to "what is vilest thing you would do in the name of love".
Takes too long time, people I play with are not that interested in characters or invested in pre-creation.

I can easily morph my game style from die-rolling hack-slash to some more talkey game style. I have moods for both, and groups for both styles.

But single most important thing why I don't do bg esp. with dm:s I don't know, is becaue I don't know the style. I want to little bit watch the game first, so I can swim in those waters. And I don't want burned dm with too much intersting stuff, and thus I tend to write about "boring life stuff", which is boring. Or I go overboard, and I do that epicly.

So, I keep game backround-lite and write stories instead to amuse mostly myself and intersting audiance of maybe 2.

Sometimes I would like to find other people to play with. I know people but I am lazy to travel, and they don't play through internet. We are old-fashioned like that.

 

[Elf Witch]

Well Elf Witch, if we were playing together I might still have motivation to create more backstory. But, alas, as it stand people who I am actually playing like it very short, or even less.

Any new game in my current larger group starts with short description what character looks, and what gear s/he is wearing. Then if we have agreed to know each other we come up some bits about personality, and some weird habits if any. Then we proceed.
Sometimes I feel quite uninterested until game starts. Sometimes I have lot more story in my head, I will share during the game at some moments.

Sometimes we use pre-made chars, with open personality-slot.

Sologames I am playing or smaller group games I dm, are ones where I do background for character, I ask some questions, they are happy with that. "You invent it for me" is common request then we go back and forth about some details.

I used to have this long questionere chart for 'important' questions ranging from "what is your favorite color" to "what is vilest thing you would do in the name of love".
Takes too long time, people I play with are not that interested in characters or invested in pre-creation.

I can easily morph my game style from die-rolling hack-slash to some more talkey game style. I have moods for both, and groups for both styles.

But single most important thing why I don't do bg esp. with dm:s I don't know, is becaue I don't know the style. I want to little bit watch the game first, so I can swim in those waters. And I don't want burned dm with too much intersting stuff, and thus I tend to write about "boring life stuff", which is boring. Or I go overboard, and I do that epicly.

So, I keep game backround-lite and write stories instead to amuse mostly myself and intersting audiance of maybe 2.

Sometimes I would like to find other people to play with. I know people but I am lazy to travel, and they don't play through internet. We are old-fashioned like that.

I can understand adapting to what the group wants, Personally I am bored to death in a hack and slash style game. I am lucky enough to play with people who want a little more some are very immersive style role players the others not so much but they want more than hack and slash. My immersive players give me detailed backgrounds and the others give me at least a paragraph.


I enjoy writing game journals and as DM I love reading them. I have several players who write them.

With my characters sometimes a back ground just clicks in my head and I can write several pages. Other times it is very vague maybe a basic idea that gets filled in more as we play. But it is never a blank slate.

When we play Shadowrun detailed backgrounds are required especially if you take any flaws.

I have a questionnaire that I sometimes use it has 8 questions on it.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

My characters always have a background, I am just very rarely inclined to write it down...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

jghjf
has no status.

Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 29
Novice (Lvl 1)

Reported

 

[Hussar]

Let's take one last stab at this beastie.

You're starting a new campaign. We'll stick with 3.5 D&D, just because it's easy.

Player comes to you with his new character. He's all excited about his concept - a brilliant guy who solves problems by talking rather than combat. He's really into Doctor Who and wants to draw his inspiration from that.

You look down at his character sheet and see: Str, Dex, Con, all 18, Int: 8, Wis: 8, Cha 6, and no social skills whatsoever.

Do you accept this character without comment or do you raise questions?

 

[avin]

You're still stuck on the background fluff?

Background matters in my games. There's no orc + beholder + ooze behind the door without a reason.

The whole thing about studying videos? It's a cover story. Hubert was actually trained by his uncle, a master of the White Lotus clan. Uncle Yoshi would've preferred a different student, someone with greater natural aptitude, but cancer made his time short, and Hubert was a willing and eager pupil.

In your game, sure. In my game his uncle would never present a clumsy nephew to his White Lotus Clan masters. It would be a waste of time. Better find something else than dishonor the clan with a horrible student.

A willing and eager elephant can't be a tiger.

Even if his uncle decide to train him he'd soon desist, leaving the poor guy as a lv 1 commoner ninja wannabe.

He can try to rally troops to his banner, but it's not going to happen very often, and when it does it's not going to last very long.

But it could be a lot of fun to roleplay.

Fun to roleplay, sure.

But that won't last very long, as you say.

 

[Dausuul]

Let's take one last stab at this beastie.

You're starting a new campaign. We'll stick with 3.5 D&D, just because it's easy.

Player comes to you with his new character. He's all excited about his concept - a brilliant guy who solves problems by talking rather than combat. He's really into Doctor Who and wants to draw his inspiration from that.

You look down at his character sheet and see: Str, Dex, Con, all 18, Int: 8, Wis: 8, Cha 6, and no social skills whatsoever.

Do you accept this character without comment or do you raise questions?

Sure, I'll raise questions*. Specifically, "Given how you want to play this guy, you're going to have to make a bunch of social and knowledge skill checks. With these stats and no points in social skills, you'll fail most of those checks and your 'solving problems by talking' approach will be a complete bust. Are you okay with that?"

It's pretty much the same way I'd approach it if someone wanted to be a powerful wizard and then showed up with a level 3 wizard/3 barbarian/5 expert. It's not a concern about roleplaying; you can play your character any way you like; but if your mechanical abilities don't back up your vision of the character, you're probably not going to like the results, so I'm going to step in, point out the flaws in your approach, and suggest you make some adjustments. If you understand the consequences of your build and are okay with them, go ahead.

I think the real question for this thread is, "Player comes to you with his new character. He's all excited about the concept, which is an uneducated but brilliant warrior with a head for puzzles. He's not very perceptive, but he's cautious and thoughtful, and he's capable of coming up with brilliant and persuasive oratory but struggles with delivery. His stats are 18 Str, 18 Dex, 18 Con, 8 Int, 8 Wis, 6 Cha. What do you do?"

To which my answer is, "Sounds like a great concept. Go for it." My concern is that the character's mechanical abilities (skill checks and such) should be able to back up the player's vision when the time comes to roll dice. If they do, then I'm not going to quibble over whether his Int is high enough to "justify" his puzzle-solving prowess.

[SIZE=-2]*Actually, the first question I'm going to raise is "What gave you the idea we were playing 42-point buy?"[/SIZE]

 

[LurkAway]

See, everyone keeps stepping up with individual examples, but, that's not really the problem. When the low Int Barbarian solves the riddle once, it's fine. After all, a little light's gotta shine on a dog's petoot once in a while. But, if the low Int Barbarian is doing it every, or even a majority of the time, then that character is not being portrayed very accurately.

So, in the marshal's case, does he gird on his guns every single time danger rears its head? Does the marshal confront that danger every time? If he does, then how does "cowardly" accurately describe this character?

Being brave once? Sure, great moment of overcoming a weakness. Being brave every time? Well, that's just ignoring the weakness because it's inconvenient.

Ironically, that's the exact same argument people use against the 'gamist' nature of 4E mechanics, like with Come and Get It (sure, that's a great example of how fighter can force the opponent to move, but every single time?)

The Shaman's description of the shaky-handed sherrif is very persuasive. But after a few times, the sherrif is going to realize that he can't control the shakes, and the next time he confronts an enemy, his fear could cause him yet again to miss, and the fear compounding the fear that the next time it will cost his life.

There are written rules for mechanical roleplaying, and there are unwritten rules for freeform roleplaying, and I agree that it's incumbent on the player to maintain an internal consistency.

It's easy to roleplay as the stats would suggest, but it's not impossible to roleplay otherwise. It's just more difficult to maintain consistency in the long run, like the trying to justify every single time why the effect of a 4E power is exactly the same all the time regardless of fictional positioning.